Rumour Draft Rumours 2024

[LB2Snake]

The whole point is that this year many view the top end as being pretty level and deep, so there isn't as big a gap in value as usual between pick 2 and pick 7.

Yeah I understand the logic. It's flawed IMO. Weighted purely as North are exploring KPP.

So you wouldn't trade pick 1 for 5+19 would you?

It's not about where a player goes at what pick, but the fact a team can choose exactly who they want and guarantee it.

Anyway, all moot till something happens. Someone will be wrong, but each team will be "very happy our guy was there"

 

[LB2Snake]

You do not need to trade 15 +18 you can keep it

End up with 15+18 +21 instead of 2

Probably end up with Shanahan, Whitlock twins, Faull, Sims

2 or 3 of the 2nd tier talls, instead of Tauru/Armstrong at 7

7+21 is not enough. Like I've asked others, would you trade pick 1 for 5+19?

We still need more A-grade players, pick 2 we can get one.

 

[sr36]

Yeah I understand the logic. It's flawed IMO. Weighted purely as North are exploring KPP.

So you wouldn't trade pick 1 for 5+19 would you?

It's not about where a player goes at what pick, but the fact a team can choose exactly who they want and guarantee it.

Anyway, all moot till something happens. Someone will be wrong, but each team will be "very happy our guy was there"

I don't know with the bolded.

But, it's not just about North's situation, we've already seen it occur with WCE trading pick 3 for less than it would have got in other years with a different cohort of kids. At that point of the draft, clubs aren't really trading pick numbers - they're trading access to players - and the cohort of players and thus the values to trade up or down changes every year.

 

[stavro#4]

I don't know with the bolded.

But, it's not just about North's situation, we've already seen it occur with WCE trading pick 3 for less than it would have got in other years with a different cohort of kids. At that point of the draft, clubs aren't really trading pick numbers - they're trading access to players - and the cohort of players and thus the values to trade up or down changes every year.

Tried explaining this on the north board the other day.

Pick 2 and even their future first (which is likely top 5) don’t hold the same weight and value because of the evenness of talent in this draft.

 

[LB2Snake]

I don't know with the bolded.

But, it's not just about North's situation, we've already seen it occur with WCE trading pick 3 for less than it would have got in other years with a different cohort of kids. At that point of the draft, clubs aren't really trading pick numbers - they're trading access to players - and the cohort of players and thus the values to trade up or down changes every year.

Carlton West Coast trade touted as one of the worst in history....West Coast got reamed. They wanted baker but **cked it up.
We've got the pick before that one. It's worth a lot more than the suggested media trades.
This article shows you how fickle the media is, or how weighted towards the bigger clubs they tend to "lead".
I like this little grab, "if you're going to trade pick 3 I'd have thought you want a pick still in the top 10, around 7, and then maybe 7 and 13"

Eagles scolded as three-club deal rocks trade period

West Coast, Blues and Tigers make trade

www.nine.com.au

 

[stavro#4]

Carlton West Coast trade touted as one of the worst in history....West Coast got reamed. They wanted baker but **cked it up.
We've got the pick before that one. It's worth a lot more than the suggested media trades.
This article shows you how fickle the media is, or how weighted towards the bigger clubs they tend to "lead".
I like this little grab, "if you're going to trade pick 3 I'd have thought you want a pick still in the top 10, around 7, and then maybe 7 and 13"

Eagles scolded as three-club deal rocks trade period

West Coast, Blues and Tigers make trade

www.nine.com.au

But the offers you have been rumoured to be getting aren’t even close to what your expecting.

The reports are that Richmond won’t offer you 6

C4[2]Yo`DooR says Port gets 10 in the deal he is across.

So really, you have only had 1 offer with a top 10 pick. Saints pick 7.

 

[LB2Snake]

Tried explaining this on the north board the other day.

Pick 2 and even their future first (which is likely top 5) don’t hold the same weight and value because of the evenness of talent in this draft.

This reads like North just don't understand how it works. Can guarantee you everyone does. But, the dilution of pick 2 is pretty fanciful because of the evenness of this draft.

Seriously, would you put all the names in a hat and just draw them out randomly?

It's kinda the same theory stavro#4

I don't think the clubs would. They will still take their allocated 5 mins between picks on the night too. They are not all the same player.

 

[LB2Snake]

But the offers you have been rumoured to be getting aren’t even close to what your expecting.

The reports are that Richmond won’t offer you 6

C4[2]Yo`DooR says Port gets 10 in the deal he is across.

So really, you have only had 1 offer with a top 10 pick. Saints pick 7.

But couldn't that explain why the deal hasn't been done? "Richmond won't offer you pick 6" doesn't mean we go, "Oh, ok, how about something else then, sorry!"

 

[stavro#4]

This reads like North just don't understand how it works. Can guarantee you everyone does. But, the dilution of pick 2 is pretty fanciful because of the evenness of this draft.

Seriously, would you put all the names in a hat and just draw them out randomly?

It's kinda the same theory stavro#4

I don't think the clubs would. They will still take their allocated 5 mins between picks on the night too. They are not all the same player.

I understand that mate.

But if clubs aren’t seeing huge differences between picks.

They aren’t going to give you the bundle you want.

Which is either 2 top 10 picks or atleast 1 and a teens pick.

Which is what we are trying to explain and whilst that eagles deal is a shocker. It also very much looks reflective of what’s on offer.

Multiple teens picks for top 10 picks

 

[sr36]

Carlton West Coast trade touted as one of the worst in history....West Coast got reamed. They wanted baker but **cked it up.
We've got the pick before that one. It's worth a lot more than the suggested media trades.
This article shows you how fickle the media is, or how weighted towards the bigger clubs they tend to "lead".
I like this little grab, "if you're going to trade pick 3 I'd have thought you want a pick still in the top 10, around 7, and then maybe 7 and 13"

Eagles scolded as three-club deal rocks trade period

West Coast, Blues and Tigers make trade

www.nine.com.au

Journos carrying on as though the same pick number has the same value every year that assume it was a shocking trade by WCE.

You can't judge a trade like that unless you're a recruiter who really understands the difference in likely player at the different picks.

And don't get me started on the concept of "risk" and how ridiculous the journos are. They're all mug punters at heart.

 

[marcmurphy3]

Rich Give 10 + 18 + 24 Get 2 +29
GWS Give 15 + 21 Get 13 +24
Port Give 13 + 29 Get 10
North give 2 Get 15 + 18 + 21

Nth give 15+18 to saints for Pick 7

I think the Saints trade is separate. It is Richmond (via Port & GWS) vs Saints for pick 2.

If Richmond wants to keep 6, any deal for 2 will need to involve both 10 and 11 going (either directly or indirectly). Don't see any other way it gets done. At the same time if the deal being spoken about involves 10 that says to me 6 isn't involved because I can't see a situation Richmond would part with both those picks for 2 even if they got something else back.

Something like:

Rich Give 10+11+20, Get 2+16
GWS Give 15+16, Get 13+20
Port Give 13 + 29, Get 10
North Give 2, Get 11+15+29

Looks pretty fair to me. Everyone is compromising in some way. Richmond gets their wish to keep 6 but have to lose 10+11. GWS slides back 4 spots at the end of the first round to move up 2 spots mid first round. Port pays 29 to move up only 3 spots but gets a top 10 pick. North slide back more than they'd like but get a 3rd top 30 pick (which they can use now that JS has retired).

North don't get the premium you normally get for pick 2 so only do this trade if they really want to split it. Values pick 2 at similar to the Westcoast trade for 3 but they get 29 on top. I personally don't know why they'd split if they can't get 6 but as I said the fact 10 is involved suggests 6 won't be.

Saints deal for 2 might be better as imagine its 8+F1 for 2. North then flip Saints F1 to GWS for 16 so Roos get 8+16. Earlier 1st pick but no 3rd pick. That's assuming GWS or anyone else in the mid-teens are willing to trade out of the first round.

 

[Wrenny]

I think the Saints trade is separate. It is Richmond (via Port & GWS) vs Saints for pick 2.

If Richmond wants to keep 6, any deal for 2 will need to involve both 10 and 11 going (either directly or indirectly). Don't see any other way it gets done. At the same time if the deal being spoken about involves 10 that says to me 6 isn't involved because I can't see a situation Richmond would part with both those picks for 2 even if they got something else back.

Something like:

Rich Give 10+11+20, Get 2+16
GWS Give 15+16, Get 13+20
Port Give 13 + 29, Get 10
North Give 2, Get 11+15+29

Looks pretty fair to me. Everyone is compromising in some way. Richmond gets their wish to keep 6 but have to lose 10+11. GWS slides back 4 spots at the end of the first round to move up 2 spots mid first round. Port pays 29 to move up only 3 spots but gets a top 10 pick. North slide back more than they'd like but get a 3rd top 30 pick (which they can use now that JS has retired).

North don't get the premium you normally get for pick 2 so only do this trade if they really want to split it. Values pick 2 at similar to the Westcoast trade for 3 but they get 29 on top.

Swap the 15 and 16 around and pretty close

 

[blaisee]

I think the Saints trade is separate. It is Richmond (via Port & GWS) vs Saints for pick 2.

If Richmond wants to keep 6, any deal for 2 will need to involve both 10 and 11 going (either directly or indirectly). Don't see any other way it gets done. At the same time if the deal being spoken about involves 10 that says to me 6 isn't involved because I can't see a situation Richmond would part with both those picks for 2 even if they got something else back.

Something like:

Rich Give 10+11+20, Get 2+16
GWS Give 15+16, Get 13+20
Port Give 13 + 29, Get 10
North Give 2, Get 11+15+29

Looks pretty fair to me. Everyone is compromising in some way. Richmond gets their wish to keep 6 but have to lose 10+11. GWS slides back 4 spots at the end of the first round to move up 2 spots mid first round. Port pays 29 to move up only 3 spots but gets a top 10 pick. North slide back more than they'd like but get a 3rd top 30 pick (which they can use now that JS has retired).

North don't get the premium you normally get for pick 2 so only do this trade if they really want to split it. Values pick 2 at similar to the Westcoast trade for 3 but they get 29 on top. I personally don't know why they'd split if they can't get 6 but as I said the fact 10 is involved suggests 6 won't be.

Agree saints have nothing to do with this, its separate

This could work

 

[tigs2010]

Yeah I understand the logic. It's flawed IMO. Weighted purely as North are exploring KPP.

So you wouldn't trade pick 1 for 5+19 would you?

It's not about where a player goes at what pick, but the fact a team can choose exactly who they want and guarantee it.

Anyway, all moot till something happens. Someone will be wrong, but each team will be "very happy our guy was there"

No but we have 8 picks and have no need for 9. We also have different needs, we have very little young talent.

If we had 1 pick and already had a number of young players from a rebuild my thoughts might be different.

 

[stavro#4]

I think the Saints trade is separate. It is Richmond (via Port & GWS) vs Saints for pick 2.

If Richmond wants to keep 6, any deal for 2 will need to involve both 10 and 11 going (either directly or indirectly). Don't see any other way it gets done. At the same time if the deal being spoken about involves 10 that says to me 6 isn't involved because I can't see a situation Richmond would part with both those picks for 2 even if they got something else back.

Something like:

Rich Give 10+11+20, Get 2+16
GWS Give 15+16, Get 13+20
Port Give 13 + 29, Get 10
North Give 2, Get 11+15+29

Looks pretty fair to me. Everyone is compromising in some way. Richmond gets their wish to keep 6 but have to lose 10+11. GWS slides back 4 spots at the end of the first round to move up 2 spots mid first round. Port pays 29 to move up only 3 spots but gets a top 10 pick. North slide back more than they'd like but get a 3rd top 30 pick (which they can use now that JS has retired).

North don't get the premium you normally get for pick 2 so only do this trade if they really want to split it. Values pick 2 at similar to the Westcoast trade for 3 but they get 29 on top. I personally don't know why they'd split if they can't get 6 but as I said the fact 10 is involved suggests 6 won't be.

Saints deal for 2 might be better as imagine its 8+F1 for 2. North then flip Saints F1 to GWS for 16 so Roos get 8+16. Earlier 1st pick but no 3rd pick. That's assuming GWS or anyone else in the mid-teens are willing to trade out of the first round.

So north trade pick 2 and miss out on Tauru the player they apparently love or Armstrong arguably the best KP player.

I get they get 11 and another teens pick.

But sheesh that’s a hard pill to swallow

 

[Orange Agent]

That doesnt work for me,

If I'm Adrian Caruso for a day.

 

[Cleric]

North just need to take the pick at 2. If that means the player they want would still be on the boards at pick 9, who cares? You get the player you want, regardless of where he sits.
Dangerfield was taken at pick 9 or 10, so you pick the best player and move on.

 

[GWS Goose]

I’m happy to give you 8+32 and maybe even a F2 for your 3 picks

I bet you would! that is a great deal for you guys

I'd be shocked if we did that.

 

[GWS Goose]

Rich Give 10 + 18 + 24 Get 2 +29
GWS Give 15 + 21 Get 13 +24
Port Give 13 + 29 Get 10
North give 2 Get 15 + 18 + 21

Nth give 15+18 to saints for Pick 7

North and St Kilda not getting great value in this trade.

Richmond and Port doing well

GWS Giants would definitely do that trade which means we are probably getting a decent deal as well (but on the surface the sort of trade that happens all the time)

 

[Mostyn]

Saints 8 to GWS for 15 and 16.
Saints 7 and 15 to North for 2.

Saints have 2 and 16
North has 7 and 15
GWS has 8

 

[GWS Goose]

The whole point is that this year many view the top end as being pretty level and deep, so there isn't as big a gap in value as usual between pick 2 and pick 7.

they may be even, but they are not the same player, Jagga Smith is a very different player to FOS, despite being roughly the same ability.
Being 2 and picking the player you want is a huge advantage of compared to 7 and taking who is left.

North trading 2 for pick 7 and 21 is absurd and just not happening.

If they can get 6 and 10 or something, they might do it. (compared to what it has taken to move up in previous years that is cheap, mostly due to it being very even)

If people wont cough up that sort of pick, I hope they keep there pick 2 and take the player they want there.

 

[stavro#4]

Saints 8 to GWS for 15 and 16.
Saints 7 and 15 to North for 2.

Saints have 2 and 16
North has 7 and 15
GWS has 8

Everyone wanting to include us in these multi trades.

The proposal presented was clear we are standalone.

7+F1.

North would need to work out what they do from there. It isn’t a trade where we need to go splitting 8 to make them happy

 

[GWS Goose]

Saints 8 to GWS for 15 and 16.
Saints 7 and 15 to North for 2.

Saints have 2 and 16
North has 7 and 15
GWS has 8

that is the closest ive seen to reasonable so far.
Prob needs a pick swap in Norths favour
Giants paying a bit to go up, which you would have to in this case.